final paper - Randy Street PO 210 Mr. Chase Ritenauer,...

Randy Street PO 210 Mr. Chase Ritenauer, Instructor April 27, 2007 Term Limits in the State Legislature In 1992 term limits were one of the issues presented on the ballot. Ohio voters voted to hold Ohio House of Representative Members to four two year terms for a total of eight years, and Ohio Senate members to two four year terms also for a total of eight years (Ohio Secretary of State Office, 1992, 1). These term limits could be interpreted in two different ways; one that the limits allow more people to be elected and help keep the government running efficiently, and two that term limits deprive these sections of legislators with the most experience in the system. The idea of term limits is a topic that is necessary to discuss and analyze the pros and cons on the issue and ultimately decide on whether term limits should remain or no longer be accepted as an option. The current term limits in office are credible for some and still others believe that the limits are the only way that the State legislature should be conducted. A stereotype often attached to politicians is that they are corrupt, and the longer the politicians are in the system, the better the chances of the official becoming corrupt. The belief that politicians become more corrupt may have led to the idea term limits are necessary by limiting the time an official has to become corrupt. An article from Washington post supports this theory saying “Proponents see career politicians as the greater threat. They say careerists are so intent to stay in office that they are more likely to betray their constituents and bow to corruption” (Heavey, 1999, 2). Also the people in support of

This preview
has intentionally blurred sections.
Sign up to view the full version.

Street 2 term limits say that a likely result of term limits is an increased chance of women and minorities being elected to office (Heavey, 1999,1). The supporters also have high hope that the limits will force newcomers to push the ethics reform that other wise would not have most likely been pushed by long term members of the legislature (Heavey, 1999,1). A study conducted at the University of Akron states that “an in-depth look at public opinion suggests potential support for lengthening the limits from the current eight years to twelve” (Bliss Institute, 2002, 1). Ohioans have several ideas that impact their opinion that term limits have contributed to the fostering a good government. One is that by limiting terms, a crop of new ideas is introduced into the legislation. Also the general public in Ohio believed that it increased the number of “Citizen Legislators” while not limiting the effectiveness of the legislature. The public also believes that limits increase the responsiveness of the legislation while not limiting the wisdom and experience within the legislature (Bliss Institute, 2002, 3-4). The overall opinion of Ohioans is that term limits are a good practice and that it builds a government that will work best for them. Some people opposing term limits argue that if the person is elected again then

This is the end of the preview. Sign up
to
access the rest of the document.